Do you think Modi can bring change if given chance?

Status
Not open for further replies.
In today's world, it is always about choosing the lesser of two evils. I would give my vote to someone who is at least talking about bringing changes and among those I would vote for those who seem to know what they are talking about and have a plan of action.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vivek.krishnan and Aladdin
Mud slinging season is about to begin :D

For Modi to become PM, BJP has to win.

For BJP to win they have to do better than congress at building coalitions.

How is BJP going to do that ?
 
What ever the views everyone may have here. Congress should not come into power again. They are the worst ruling our country. The politics they are playing now in my state(Andhra Pradesh) can be the best example for anyone to understand what they are. All they know is eat and let others eat(money in scams).
And also that is the reason why none of the political leaders in their party don't turn against them easily. Because everyone is involved in some kind of scams.
If they turn against them, a case from CBI will be filed and the rebellion leader will be put behind the bars.
That is what is happening to some leaders in AP now.

All we need is a change. So we should definitely vote congress down to save ourselves. Not for one term but until it gets destroyed.

@ayanavish and @haris5sani Remove the links in your posts too.
Link removed
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kilroyquasar
What bullshit you have posted. Seems like saffron propaganda.
The Nehru-Gandhi dynasty starts with the Mughal man named Ghiyasuddin Ghazi.
Click to expand...

Yeah, cool story bro. I get it, my nationalistic sentiments have been aroused to the maximum extent. We are being ruled by Mughal descendants, and to change that, we need to replace them with Hindu nationalists.

I don't expect such bullshit to be posted at least in TE. There are many people who can think clearly here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RD274 and haris5sani
oymhf.jpg

This thread is shit:banghead::banghead::banghead:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kilroyquasar, Gannu and Criminal
Damn aliens.
OT: why do Americans call outsiders from other countries as aliens? Can't understand the logic. :s
 
Right, so long as people don't take any of it personally and just treat it as the business of politics then all should be good :)

Part and parcel of living in a democratic country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: abhishek2600
Its come down to a level now that I don't want the Scamgress back in power, nor their chamchas. I will give BJP/NDA a chance, but if they f*** that up, I am voting for no one then.
 
right now there is no electricity in 13 districts of my state. This is because of the congress vote politics. instead of resolving the issue they are appointing a new CM NOW. i just dont understand how they can do things like this now.[DOUBLEPOST=1381160225][/DOUBLEPOST]also there is an option coming now in upcoming evm's. There will be an option called 'none of the above'. Don't know whether it is true or not. If yes, I will choose that option.
 
Someone raised a lot of concerns for "none of the above" option.

None Of The Above (NOTA) under Election Rules 49(O)is not a silver bullet for ensuring better political system in India for the reasons:

(1) If there are hundred voters and 90 of them exercise NOTA, what will be the intrinsic value of such votes, will they be treated as invalid votes?
(2) Of the remaining 10 voters, if six of them cast their votes in favor of a candidate, under first past the post terms under the existing rules, that candidate will have to be declared as elected.
(3) This means a person who has just got six votes will rule over the rest of 94 people - will this be correct?
(4) If these NOTA votes are to be treated as valid votes, then Election Rules/ Peoples Representation Act etc., will have to be amended by an Act of Parliament.
(5) If these NOTA votes become valid and are in majority, then will there be re-election and what if the same candidates contest ?
(6) If NOTA candidates are to be barred, will it not violate constitutional rights?
(7) If a re-election is ordered, there will be huge expenditure and people will have to pay more taxes and also results in lot of inconvenience for people with frequent elections.

In view of these confusions, it would be better if Supreme Court orders that the 13 electoral reforms pending with the Government and recommended by successive Chief Election Commissioners are taken up within the framework of the laws and implemented for ensuring better political governance. ( http://eci.nic.in/eci_main/ele... ) In addition, other electoral reforms like minimum qualification, maximum age limit, compulsory voting, if a minimum percentage of votes are not secured such a candidate to be barred from contesting future elections.
Click to expand...
 
ayanavish said:
Someone raised a lot of concerns for "none of the above" option.
Click to expand...
Umm the third and 4th concerns - even in today's world with very low turnouts a representative gets elected. A shining example is our dis-Honorable Olympic level scam artist - Suresh Kalmadi. That guy was elected on a 35% turnout in Pune. It means, even with valid votes he would have represented a mere minimum 17% of the electorate. So I think the 90 rule will go along more on the third rather than fourth - at least thats what it looks like if no turnout = invalid vote option is used.
 
^ More concerned about "7". The politicians would happily agree and give a damn to the Exchequer if re-election indeed is ordered in any given scenario.
 
ayanavish said:
Someone raised a lot of concerns for "none of the above" option.
Click to expand...
the none of the above would be productive only when there is 100% compulsory voting.
then the more than 50% votes can be held valid and all the condidates barred from re election
 
In our voting system, there should be some rules like some explained above. These should be mandatory
1. Educational Qualifications
2. No cases and clean background
3. If rejected, they cannot participate in that elections. So there is no chance for them to participate in that same elections again. Again if they are rejected in next term elections i.e after five years, they should not have chance to participate in elections for lifetime and should be banned. So that for the first time if they fail, they will try hard to be good and gain goodwill in people. If they get elected in the next elections bacause of being good before and don't do good, they will be failed in next elections and lose their chance to participate in elections and banned. So after winning they will try to be good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom